Cases 1 - 10 of 725
Millbrook v. Lodge et al
as 4:2024cv00284
Defendant:
Whittaker, Quinn Riess, Noble and others
Plaintiff:
Kim Millbrook
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Smock v. Daniels et al
as 1:2024cv01336
Plaintiff:
Aaron John Smock
Defendant:
Sheriff Dan Daniels, Quinn, Dawley and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Quinn v. WellPath Medical Services et al
as 3:2024cv01248
Defendant:
Department of Corrections Collegiate Board Members, RN Supervisor Blanche Milo, Geisinger Hospital and others
Plaintiff:
Phillip Quinn
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1441 Petition for Removal- Civil Rights Act
Abao et al v. Quinn et al
as 2:2024cv03453
Defendant:
Marian Helen Quinn and Paul Quinn
Plaintiff:
George Cunningham and Nanette Abao
Cause Of Action: 28 U.S.C. § 1983 Civil Rights
WRIGHT v. LINER et al
as 3:2024cv00279
Plaintiff:
DARIAN MAURICE WRIGHT
Defendant:
R QUINN and TRISTEN LINER
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Wright v. Liner et al
as 8:2024cv01316
Defendant:
R. Quinn and Christian Liner
Plaintiff:
Darian Maurice Wright
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Haynes v. Quinn et al
as 5:2024cv00125
Defendant:
FNU Lay, FNU Starowicz, FNU Quinn and others
Plaintiff:
Robert Jeremy Haynes
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Hancock v. Unknown
as 3:2024cv01210
Plaintiff:
Jimmy Hancock
Defendant:
Unknown, Spurlock, Mr. Adkins and others
Cause Of Action: 42 U.S.C. § 1983 Prisoner Civil Rights
Michael Dobson v. Dr. Thompson
as 24-6403
Plaintiff:
MICHAEL DOBSON
Defendant:
DR. THOMPSON, HAROLD W. CLARKE, STEVEN HERRICK and others
Alfredo Martinez-Perez v. Gina Clark, et al
as 24-1672
Plaintiff:
ALFREDO MARTINEZ-PEREZ
Defendant:
GINA CLARK, Superintendent - SCI Chester, M QUINN, Grievance Coordinator - SCI Chester and DR. PAUL G. LITTLE, Doctor - SCI Chester
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
